this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
328 points (99.4% liked)

Privacy

32111 readers
622 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The legal situation is more complex and nuanced than the headline implies, so the article is worth reading. This adds another ruling to the confusing case history regarding forced biometric unlocking.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Xerodin@lemm.ee 53 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Not without a search warrant.

[โ€“] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 0 points 7 months ago

And what if it's the trunk of his car?

Which better relates to the case in the OP, as the lack of a search warrant was never the question here:

Payne conceded that "the use of biometrics to open an electronic device is akin to providing a physical key to a safe" but argued it is still a testimonial act because it "simultaneously confirm[s] ownership and authentication of its contents," the court said. "However, Payne was never compelled to acknowledge the existence of any incriminating information. He merely had to provide access to a source of potential information."